AI poised to be the industrial revolution on steroids

[justjeff]

in re: overturning social structure

I'm currently in a book study on John Senior's books, "The Death of Christian Culture and "The Restoration of Christian Culture.

His thesis is that the necessary foundation for western culture at its height was the truth, beauty and goodness of its philosophy, literature, art and music... and that to restore it, that crumbled foundation needs to be restored first.

In lamenting the social fabric of western society that has been unraveling for some centuries now, he quotes an excerpt from "The Deserted Village" (1770) by Oliver Goldsmith

Ill fares the land, to hast'ning ills a prey,
Where wealth accumulates and men decay:
Princes and lords may flourish or may fade;
A breath can make them, as a breath has made;
But a bold peasantry, their country's pride,
When once destroyed, can never be supplied.
A time there was, 'ere England's griefs began,
When every rood of ground maintained its man;
For him light labour spread the wholesome store,
Just gave what life required, but gave no more;
His best companions, innocence and health;
And his best riches, ignorance of wealth.
But times are alter'd; trade's unfeeling train
Usurp the land and dispossess the swain;
Along the lawn, where scattr'd hamlets rose,
Unwieldly wealth, and cumbrous pomp repose;
And every want to opulence allied,
And every pang that folly pays to pride.
Those gentle hours that plenty bade to bloom,
The Air-Conditioned Holocaust • 47
Those calm desires that ask'd but little room,
Those healthful sports that grac'd the peaceful scene,
Liv'd in each look and brighten'd all the green;
These, far departing, seek a kinder shore,
And rural mirth and manners are no more.

My own grappling with some of the above text highlights his assertion that college students today are so far behind their forebears in centuries past that they need remedial reading to even get to the level of reading the great books and literature of the past. In fact, I used AI several times in his books to help explain certain passages and words. Some of that is due to the changes in the English language over time, but far more is due to a lack of reading good solid books for hours at a time rather than flitting around from page to page on the internet consuming what is typically garbage and often in little snippets of time on any particular subject.

My reliance on AI is also an ironic foreshadowing of the warning in the following 19 min video about the mega societal upheaval predicted in the next couple of years:

Ex-Google Insider WARNS: "You Are Not Prepared For 2027" (19:24) (playing at a faster speed, such as 1.25X works well for me)

x-Google design ethicist and AI expert Tristan Harris reveals the truth about what artificial intelligence is about to do to jobs, the economy, politics, and the future of human purpose. After years inside Google and more than a decade researching the social effects of technology, Tristan warns that we are approaching a moment where AI outpaces human control and reshapes society faster than governments can react.

Drawing on examples from social media, global trade, student debt, and national security, Tristan shows how AI will redefine every issue from immigration to democracy. He also shares the personal story behind his mission to warn the world before it is too late.

Discover:
• Why AI is eliminating jobs much faster than people realise
• The real reason UBI may not work in an AI-driven world
• How entire economies could collapse when key job sectors disappear
• Why junior workers and new graduates are at the highest risk
• How political power shifts when humans are no longer needed for labour
• The shocking rise of "AI immigrants" replacing cognitive work
• How AI will reshape education, healthcare, and national security
• The urgent steps needed to avoid a global economic crisis

[Geremia]

humans are no longer needed for labour

Humans will always be needed.

[justjeff]

humans are no longer needed for labour

Humans will always be needed.

Sure, but his thesis, despite that snippet, wasn't that no humans would be needed in the future because of AI advances, but that far fewer would be needed. That seems almost self-evident to me.

The question, really boils down to whether that will be a boon to society and to the world, or whether it will lead to a more dystopian society.

From my perspective, it is a tool, and like all tools it can be used for good or evil.

I would bet that he is right in saying that we are coming to a big decision point and things could go extremely well, extremely badly or anywhere in between... in a relatively short time.

John Senior lamented the destruction the industrial revolution inflicted upon Catholic Culture. He felt that although that revolution brought about great increases in productivity and upon material wealth in general, it turned society on its head at the time, creating much misery in some quarters... poverty in some, and a great concentration of wealth in others. Over time, that material wealth and the benefits of that productivity "trickled down" if you will to the masses, resulting in a standard of living unprecedented in world history. But Mr. Senior would probably posit that the tradeoff was not really worth it. That the moral fabric of society and of families was stronger before that particular economic revolution and that people are not really in fact better off now than when they didn't have the material wealth now available to virtually everyone. They were happier then, didn't have the suicide rates nor the mental derangements or moral depravity that is all too common now.

I can see and understand his point of view, though I'm not convinced that Satan's attacks on the Church and upon humanity would not have had similar deleterious effects even without the industrial revolution. But he may be right.

In his book, Economics in One Lesson, Henry Hazlett has some excellent counterpoints to the arguments that have historically come up regarding industrialization taking away human jobs. The dire predictions about the drastic reduction in jobs never turned out to be correct in the grand scheme of things. They certainly might cause job losses in some places, but would result in job gains and a greater standard of living for more people.

His book contained many examples of that counterintuitive fact. My father-in-law's situation was a striking example of that phenomenon. He was a carpenter as a very young lad after WWII. The carpenters union fought against the use of power tools on the job. Using electric saws and drills would reduce the number of carpenter hours needed to build a home, quite obviously. But they lost that battle, and it turned out that far more carpenters had jobs after those time saving tools boosted their productivity. The relative cost of homes dropped, allowing more people to purchase new homes, or to have older ones renovated or expanded.

Despite that fact, there is still uncertainty as to whether that same phenomenon will play out in the future. I love using the nascent AI tools at my disposal. They save me time in digging through a lot of web pages or books to find an answer. They have the promise of making everyone more efficient, and improving our lives in countless ways.

But it is also true that we see powerful people in powerful groups who have been calling for world depopulation on a grand scale. Some have called for cutting world population by some 90%. Evil organizations such as Planned Parenthood have no shortage of wealthy sponsors. Powerful eugenicists funded Margaret Sanger from the beginning, and have promoted people like Peter Singer. The idea of breeding a race of thoroughbreds or of an elite class that really doesn't need so many of the "useless eaters" has not died away. The idea that humans are a scourge on the earth has grown in popularity, if anything.

[Geremia]

far fewer would be needed

Intelligent, moral humans would be needed.

In his book, Economics in One Lesson, Henry Hazlett has some excellent counterpoints to the arguments that have historically come up regarding industrialization taking away human jobs. The dire predictions about the drastic reduction in jobs never turned out to be correct in the grand scheme of things. They certainly might cause job losses in some places, but would result in job gains and a greater standard of living for more people.

His book contained many examples of that counterintuitive fact. My father-in-law's situation was a striking example of that phenomenon. He was a carpenter as a very young lad after WWII. The carpenters union fought against the use of power tools on the job. Using electric saws and drills would reduce the number of carpenter hours needed to build a home, quite obviously. But they lost that battle, and it turned out that far more carpenters had jobs after those time saving tools boosted their productivity. The relative cost of homes dropped, allowing more people to purchase new homes, or to have older ones renovated or expanded.

Interesting example.
Yes, technology is morally neutral, but its use isn't.